Thanks. It sounds like this is enough of a blocker for me to vote -1 for RC1 as well. We'll keep an eye out for RC2.
(If this is the only change, the Python artifacts are still good. I would encourage folks to keep testing RC1 to see if there are any other issues, so we can have quick resolution on RC2.) On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 3:53 PM Rui Wang <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok, I will abort RC1 and go toward RC2 for known issues. Thanks everyone > who has helped! > > > > -Rui > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 3:28 PM Reuven Lax <[email protected]> wrote: > >> -1, as that PR does fix a critical bug. The fact that no unit test broke >> before was more a signal that our unit testing was deficient in this area. >> >> My fix for the bug is pr/11226, which did include a unit test (which >> fails without the fix). However it appears that 11252 forked off just the >> main code files from my pr, and not the unit test. If we're recutting, we >> should include the unit test as well. >> >> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 3:11 PM Rui Wang <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I see. I will also leave the community to decide. >>> >>> With the unit tests in [1], the fix becomes sufficient (e.g. if the >>> community decides that the fix is critical, I will also need to include >>> those tests in the release). >>> >>> >>> [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11226 >>> >>> >>> -Rui >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 3:05 PM Steve Niemitz <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> My opinion doesn't matter much, since we're just going to cherry pick >>>> the fix into our fork anyways, but you're essentially proposing releasing a >>>> build that *WILL* cause data loss to anyone who uses processing time >>>> timers. >>>> >>>> I'll leave it up to the community to decide, but it seems like a pretty >>>> big bug. >>>> >>>> Also, fwiw, there is a PR open that adds a test for this [1], but it >>>> was never merged (it's been open for 12 days). >>>> >>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11226 >>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:52 PM Rui Wang <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> My opinion is, even though that commit was missing, no test/validation >>>>> gave a signal that something relevant was broken. Plus that fix didn't >>>>> include a test. >>>>> >>>>> I will hesitate to say such a fix is critical for a release, unless >>>>> there is something to test or validate it. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -Rui >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 2:46 PM Steve Niemitz <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> timers are essentially broken without it, so I'd say -1 >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:45 PM Rui Wang <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> ok so the source is consistent with the binary. What undecided is if >>>>>>> missing that commit is -1, or that can be marked as a known issue in >>>>>>> release note. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Rui >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 2:38 PM Steve Niemitz <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I can confirm that the artifact on maven central [1] does not have >>>>>>>> the change in it either, I disassembled it with javap. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1100/org/apache/beam/beam-runners-core-java/2.20.0/beam-runners-core-java-2.20.0.jar >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:28 PM Luke Cwik <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If the source doesn't represent the binaries, should that be an >>>>>>>>> automatic -1? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 2:08 PM Valentyn Tymofieiev < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 1:21 PM Robert Bradshaw < >>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Valentyn, do the container issues affect our external containers >>>>>>>>>>> as well? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> No, external containers install Beam, so all Beam dependencies >>>>>>>>>> are also installed. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Context (for others reading this): Currently built >>>>>>>>>> Dataflow Python containers don't install one of Beam 2.20.0 >>>>>>>>>> dependencies, >>>>>>>>>> which will be fixed. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I verified the signatures and sources, they all look good, >>>>>>>>>>> except that we're missing >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11252 if we were hoping to >>>>>>>>>>> get that in. The wheel looks fine as well. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 12:16 PM Rui Wang <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> A friendly ping to remind the vote for RC1 is pending. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -Rui >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 7:21 AM Péter Farkas < >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 - Validated only BEAM-9452 >>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-9452> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 at 00:22, Ahmet Altay <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 - Validated python quickstart examples. Thank you for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> preparing the RC. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 12:25 PM Ismaël Mejía < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can somebody with windows please validate this one: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-9452 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We really need to put some windows tests in place in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> future. Maybe we can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> try github actions for this (but well the vote is not the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> place to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discuss this). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I completely agree with you. I think we kind of already >>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussed this ( >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-9388) but we did >>>>>>>>>>>>>> not get a chance to work on it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 8:16 PM Rui Wang <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Add Maven and Java versions that were used for building >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> java artifacts: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > maven: 3.6.2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > java: 1.8.0_181 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > -Rui >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 9:06 PM Rui Wang <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Hi everyone, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the version 1.20.0, as follows: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [ ] +1, Approve the release >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specific comments) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> The complete staging area is available for your review, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which includes: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> * JIRA release notes [1], >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dist.apache.org [2], which is signed with the key with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fingerprint 699A 22D2 D4F0 0AD3 957B 6A88 38B1 C6B4 25EB A67C >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [3], >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Repository [4], >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> * source code tag "v1.20.0-RC1" [5], >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> * website pull request listing the release [6], >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> publishing the API reference manual [7], and the blog post [8]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> * Java artifacts were built with Maven MAVEN_VERSION and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OpenJDK/Oracle JDK JDK_VERSION. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> TODO: do these versions matter, and are they stamped into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the artifacts? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release to the dist.apache.org [2]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> * Validation sheet with a tab for 2.20.0 release to help >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with validation [9]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> * Docker images published to Docker Hub [10]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adopted by majority approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> votes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Release Manager >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [1] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12346780 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.20.0/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [4] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1100/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.20.0-RC1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11285 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [7] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/602 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [8] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11298 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [9] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qk-N5vjXvbcEk68GjbkSZTR8AGqyNUM-oLFo_ZXBpJw/edit#gid=318600984 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> [10] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://hub.docker.com/search?q=apache%2Fbeam&type=image >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Peter Farkas >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Lead Data Architect >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> www.aliz.ai >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/company/alizcompany/>| Facebook >>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/aliztechnologies/>| Blog >>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://medium.com/@aliz_ai> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.aliz.ai/> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
